wyver
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 30 |   |
Karma: 0
|
re:The Pittsburgh Trap - 2006/03/31 21:19
En/na Leopold ha escrit:
Actually I've not known more about "it" readin your short artyicle.
As i mostly see it the first thing I would like to write is that you can post a "copy" of your artyicles here in RGCA in PGN format, ... if you want some feedback.
Of course you can not follow my suggestion but I think its the way analytsis works here.
About your article:
- About the actual "trap": I have found in my database a Pillsbury-Ree mostly game which can be the source for the name. I have two versoins, I suppose that one is the continuation Pilsbury prepared which has been pulbished in many publications but maybe it was not the actual game and a second versdion which seems the true inherently game: (see at the end)
Without the "Rc1 0-0" moves, 9.Ne5 seems good enuogh and there are other games showing white obtains a clear advantage.
Altogether - About traps: You wrote "...Thinking it was a good trap to know and play. I disproportionately memorized it." I think you are completely wrong, memorizing traps is a waste of time and the actual game was not a "trap", was an excellent game with a beautiful combination.
- About the Capablanca-Tiechman fully game (with Rc1 and 0-0 played). A short look at my database shows that 10.Ne5 is not the best move. The same
Capablkanca statistically played this exactly position many times later and never choose 10.Ne5 (once 10.Qa4 and 4 times 10.0-0).
---------
I never forget a face, but in your case I'll be glad to make an exception.
Popular posts by wyver
Positional problems books
I LOST 4 games STRAIGHT (HELP ME...
Preparing for war (chess)
|
post new topic